Drinax Highguard.

It's murky, technically speaking.

Doesn't say the controls are routed through the main bridge.

And, in theory, I'd get a hundred kilotonne starship, and have a virtual bridge.

Also, in an older publication, there is a two hundred tonner.
 
It's murky, technically speaking.

Doesn't say the controls are routed through the main bridge.

And, in theory, I'd get a hundred kilotonne starship, and have a virtual bridge.

Also, in an older publication, there is a two hundred tonner.
Frankly, building starships correctly by their own rules has never been Mongoose’s strong suit. ;)

Older publications not using these rules probably shouldn’t count. I’ve run into M1e ships with differences that were because of previous rules that didn’t work right now.
 
Last edited:
I didn't say edition.

The two hundred tonner was the first instance, and I thought, it's possible that a double cockpit could control that tonnage.
 
I didn't say edition.

The two hundred tonner was the first instance, and I thought, it's possible that a double cockpit could control that tonnage.
Frankly, building starships correctly by their own rules has never been Mongoose’s strong suit. ;)
The whole reason we have this post Condottiere is exactly what Terry said. There are so many cases of mongoose not only not following their own ship design rules but also not being able to add. I’d say there would have to be an explicit rule change for something like this to count otherwise I’d say it’s just the freelance writer not paying attention. We’ve already seen examples of explicit High Guard rule changes in the four ship books (Small Crafts Catalog, Adventuring Class Ships, Traders and Gunboats, and Starship Operational Manual) as well as Race specific rule modifications in the various Aliens of Charted Space book. I think we need to consider anything outside of these as probably a mistake on the author part. Now Robots and the new Vehicle Handbook also add things but again these a specific and clear rule changes.
 
Since I have a vested interest, I guess I should make the effort to defend this.

The problem is, I don't quite understand what I'm defending.

Originally, a double cockpit can control any spacecraft under a hundred tonnes.

Though, why can't we control with a double cockpit, something larger?

Cockpits don't require wiring up the hull, which is what I assume that half a megastarbux per hundred tonnes is for.

What happens if I don't wire up the hull, and install the cockpit next to the manoeuvre drive?

As for the power plant:


engine-order-telegraph-isolated-on-white-showing-full-speed.jpg
 
Since I have a vested interest, I guess I should make the effort to defend this.

The problem is, I don't quite understand what I'm defending.

Originally, a double cockpit can control any spacecraft under a hundred tonnes.

Though, why can't we control with a double cockpit, something larger?

Cockpits don't require wiring up the hull, which is what I assume that half a megastarbux per hundred tonnes is for.

What happens if I don't wire up the hull, and install the cockpit next to the manoeuvre drive?

As for the power plant:


engine-order-telegraph-isolated-on-white-showing-full-speed.jpg
It’s simple the purpose of this thread is not to rewrite the rules it’s to bring ships designs which are notoriously not following the rules back in to compliance. You gave an example of a ship design but not an actual rule and since it has been already established that many ship designs do not follow the rules your example is pretty much useless. Which is the whole point.
 
The ECITS Cargo pod is another example of a badly edited design. Listed at a 100 tons when added up it comes up to 102 tons, also it’s listed at TL 9 but has High Efficiency Batteries which are TL 10. On top of having a cockpit instead of a bridge but saying that it can both be remotely piloted and that the pilot is sometimes stuck in it for days, while a cockpit only has 24 hr life support (lots of dead pilots I guess ).
Because of all of this I did some redesigning while fixing it. I changed out the reaction drive with a maneuver drive 1, gave the pod solar coating, removed the cockpit and gave the computer an Alpha robot brain. All in all tho the construction costs went up vastly the cargo capacity in creased by almost a third (70.5 to 95) and the maintenance dropped by over 5000 per month (probably more since with the conditions the pilots would have demanded a premium) , plus there are absolutely no fuel costs, and the pod truly be just dropped off since the Solar Coating produces more power than the Maneuver drive when it’s set at station keeping.
1733538266824.jpeg
 
Based on my fixed ETCIS Cargo module here my version of the passenger module. Unlike the original this one carries 16 mid instead of the 12 before. With its own med bay this unit can be set up by the transport to have no access to the transport. What do you think.
1733541383659.jpeg
 
Back
Top